One option for a pet owner desiring to keep a pet in or out of a specific area of a home is to use a physical barrier, such as a baby gate. However, a baby gate has a number of limitations making it less than ideal for the task. There are some locations where a baby gate cannot be installed because the passageway is too large or there are simply no suitable attachment points. A baby gate is often unsightly, awkward to use, and unnecessarily impedes passage for everyone, not just the pet. Further, pets have been known to knock down, jump over, or chew through baby gates.
Another option for a pet owner desiring to keep a pet in or out of a specific area of a home is to use a proximity triggered system that emits an audible or spray deterrent when an animal approaches a detector unit located near the restricted area. Many such proximity triggered systems use passive or active optical sensors (e.g., infrared) and/or ultrasonic sensors to detect when an animal approaches the restricted area. Proximity triggered systems are generally inaccurate, prone to false activation, and indiscriminate in their application of the deterrent.
A third option for a pet owner desiring to keep a pet in or out of a specific area of a home is to use an electronic animal exclusion system including a transmitter sending signal and a stimulus unit worn by the pet that delivers a stimulus in response to the transmitter signal. Such electronic animal exclusion systems are not without their disadvantages. Placement of the electronic animal exclusion system transmitter is critical for proper electromagnetic field distribution. Being derived from electronic animal containment systems designed for outdoor use, currently available electronic animal exclusion systems produce a substantially spherical electromagnetic field with a diameter that is adjustable between approximately 1.8 m (6 ft) and 3.7 m (12 ft). Even at the lowest setting, the coverage area is often wider, taller, and/or deeper than the pet owner desires making it difficult to place the unit to cover the restricted area without inadvertently covering an area where the pet is allowed. This problem is exacerbated because the transmitter from a conventional electronic animal exclusion system is generally placed to the side of the door to be blocked rather centered in the door jamb where it would be a trip hazard. In such a case, the electromagnetic field must be increased to cover the entire width of the door increasing the chance that access to a permitted area will also be blocked. It was with these problems in mind that the present invention was conceived.